I am thinking of the WTF, I've never trained ITF, although I'm sure this question could be applied to them too.

Should Taekwondo do away with the patchwork forms they made up in a fit of rigteous anti-japanese nationalism and either do away with forms altogether, or decide on stylistic combat principles, self defence techs and training drills and design a set of new forms with complimentary training that they can use to reform the art en masse?Or should they just keep their forms and carry on as normal?

Taekwondo has become it's own animal since it's creation. While it is still mostly made up of Karate movements it has developed it's own science for applying them, plus as I understand it the art of Hapkido is slowly being absorbed by taekwondo. The forms that exist currently do not express how taekwondo is used or how it could/should be used. They don't in my view express anything other than a desire to not be Japanese.

Deciding on combat principles specific to the style/art that is taekwondo is what I meant. That is deciding on methods for defence and attack for use in actual combat as opposed to sport, that can/do form the basis of the fighting art.

The purpose of forms has always been to encapsulate such principles and provide a base for training.

Ashihara and Enshin Karate have both done away with traditional Karate forms because they didn't reflect how they saw fit to use karate so practicing them gave them nothing when they trained. I personally think TKD should take the same leap.

Quote:plus as I understand it the art of Hapkido is slowly being absorbed by taekwondo.

I'm not sure I believe this statement. There are many schools that have Hapkido blended with their Taekwondo, mine does. My feeling is that either you do or you don't. I doubt schools that don't just deciding to incorporate it slowly, they would need to have some time of original influence. My feeling is those schools have been training their Taekwondo for years and they pass down to their Instructors the same teachings and they will carrying on and pass down what they learned to their new Instructors. If anything I see more of a watering down of the system and not additions to their systems. Don't get me wrong, there may be a few schools doing just what you said but the majority are doing far less and becoming so commercialized that they are forgetting much of what Taekwondo originally meant. IMO

_________________________"IF I COME ... I'M BRINGING THE PAIN WITH ME"

I personally do not think that the Chang Hon TKD Tuls should be altered. They have been diluted and obscured enough as it is. Quite a few stances / postures and movements can be seen not only in Shotokan Patterns, but also in many KungFu styles, including Wing Chun. Also what are taught as blocks are in fact strikes or breaks.

I think the problem with Tuls lie in our perception of what a Tul really is.We look at the whole as if we were being attacked in a poorly choreographed Martial Arts movie. This makes us feel that what we are performing are not only outdated, but in most cases almost suicidal movement sequences.

Treat each Tul as a phrase book. Look at the movements in short sequences.Think about the blocks/punches in relation to the stance that there are in and the stance that they came from. Look at other traditional styles and how they do their patterns. Ask them for their movement explanations.

There is so much you can learn from these Tuls, if you don’t throw them away.We used to have a guy called Sonjin (I think). He had a great approach to Tuls.

_________________________
I am NOT homophobic... I am NOT afraid of my own house!

As I understand it the WTF have changed the forms once or twice already.

Chang Hon wise, I think the tul syllabus is pretty good with the patterns showing a variety of different hand techniques which are also used in 3-step. 2 step etc. Some of these are also brought into free-sparring (unlike in WTF competition sparring).

What I think does need to happen is greater instruction on the application of techniques within the forms. That and more 'reality' training generally.

_________________________
See how well I block your punches with my jaw!!

From what I've seen of tkd forms they just aren't well put together. There are techniques but no fighting strategy although as I said I can only really speak for wtf forms. Trevek, you mentioned that some techniques from your patterns can be used in #-step sparring and some could be used in free sparring. My point is that everything in your forms should be reflected in either free or one step sparring and applicable outside the dojang. If you guys can work your forms to deliver a complete understanding of combat and fighting methods and street applicable training drills though that is great and I do not dispute it one way or the other.

What I was really refering to is the way modern tkd fights in relation to how the forms say it should be done. New forms could make use of the highly functional upright side on fighting stances greater use of kicks and boxing style hand work that has become more prevalent, as opposed to heavy use of deep stances which retard kicking and general movement (two of the most important parts of tkd as I was taught it) and old style heavy hand work (reverse punches, chopping attacks etc). As I said TKD has grown beyond the stunted Karate of it's roots and become it's own animal and I think it should revamp and re-traditionalise its self to reflect this.

What I was trying to say was that even at the lower-belt level many of the moves are brought into the step-sparring sequences. Obviously/hopefully the practitioner will then bring these into their 1-step.

So things like clinch-and-knee, elbow-strikes, kick-to-knee, footwork from the lower grade patterns are already being trained in both through patterns and step-sparring.

Of course, if you're doing competition based sparring, even CH/ITF style (which allows head punches etc) there are some techniques, like knees and elbows, which won't be used.

_________________________
See how well I block your punches with my jaw!!

I rather like the Taegeuks. They've got a good progression for a beginner and gradually involve them in more complex footwork and techniques. They also contain a decent selection of techniques which can form a solid basis for a beginner in TKD, even some techniques and applications which are valuable at an advanced level. I see no reason to change them.

Quote:I personally do not think that the Chang Hon TKD Tuls should be altered. They have been diluted and obscured enough as it is. Quite a few stances / postures and movements can be seen not only in Shotokan Patterns, but also in many KungFu styles, including Wing Chun. Also what are taught as blocks are in fact strikes or breaks.

hehe you don't have to tell me that! but what i meant by the comment was that if tkd claims to be a distinct ma then they should have made bigger efforts to show the distinction in there forms instead of creating the mishmash that resulted from the atempt to break away from shotokan.

Quote:

I think the problem with Tuls lie in our perception of what a Tul really is.We look at the whole as if we were being attacked in a poorly choreographed Martial Arts movie. This makes us feel that what we are performing are not only outdated, but in most cases almost suicidal movement sequences.

Treat each Tul as a phrase book. Look at the movements in short sequences.Think about the blocks/punches in relation to the stance that there are in and the stance that they came from. Look at other traditional styles and how they do their patterns. Ask them for their movement explanations.

There is so much you can learn from these Tuls, if you don’t throw them away.We used to have a guy called Sonjin (I think). He had a great approach to Tuls.

i have spent most of the 20 years i've trained in tkd looking at this. but it took me to looking at the original forms in shotokan and okinawan arts to realise the full potential!! i now train in 5 heian katas and naihanchi as well as looking at obscure movements in chang hon forms.

TUL is the Korean term used to described Patterns. Many Koreans still use the term Hyung which translates closer to form. However, Tul is closer to pattern. As what you are doing when performing Tuls is creating a pattern of movements, much like a gym nastics floor routine. Now a gymnasist can have good form, but do a poor floor routine, much like a Taekwon-Doin can have generally good form, but can perform a pattern poorly.So Tul is merely a better term to describe what someone is doing. I hope this helps.

As you can see these are far less ambiguous as to their application and teach techniques and movements that are directly applicable to combat (assuming you are competent to use high kicks in real combat). Personally I think pooling the years of hapkido, millitary taekwondo and sport skills into a set of forms like this would be an awesome addition to the art. Especially if they got some senior karateka to help them structure the forms in order to layer applications and principles into the movements.

Anyway, I won't bang on about it if the concensus is that they should stay as is so be it. The more voices though the better the debate, so if anyone else has a view lets hear it!

Quote:What I was really refering to is the way modern tkd fights in relation to how the forms say it should be done. New forms could make use of the highly functional upright side on fighting stances greater use of kicks and boxing style hand work that has become more prevalent, as opposed to heavy use of deep stances which retard kicking and general movement (two of the most important parts of tkd as I was taught it) and old style heavy hand work (reverse punches, chopping attacks etc).

This paragraph struck me and wanted to comment about it. Why must everything be in the patterns? Does TKD and other martial arts get defined by the patterns/forms they do? I think not and only see the patterns as an extension of the whole program and a means to train techniques repeatedly in a sequence by one's self. Anything substantial to learn for fighting you learn by .... fighting. If you think that you are going to learn how to be a better TKD'ist I can tell you now that you are not going to learn it from patterns. You are not going to learn it by breaking boards. You are not going to learn it by one-steps, etc. All of these most certainly will help overall but you have to have application of the techniques against resisting partners, heavy bags, focus mitts, slammer shields, etc.

You learn the basics and then you apply them. Constant application of these techniques will make you a better fighter if that is what you chose to be. Patterns will contain many of these techniques and are a way of practicing them on your own, but I don't think a system should be based on the pattern to teach you all that you need. If you do then you are sadly mistaken and will come out on the short end of the stick each and every time.

I can tell you for myself, if patterns were the only things I would have been gone a long time ago. If the patterns were done away with all together that wouldn't hurt my feelings as I prefer working techniques through application with resistance. I feel only then can you truly understand what you are doing.

_________________________"IF I COME ... I'M BRINGING THE PAIN WITH ME"

how many times have masters told us that all we need to know about our art is in the patterns we have in the syllabus!!

in tkd's case this does not happen until you get to higher forms with the lower grade patterns being re-jigged versions of shotokan. now if tkd really wanted to be distinctive as they clim to be then they would reflect this in the lower forms as well as the higher ones.

i think that the wtf forms do a better job of this. but then the chang hon forms are eaiser to relate back to karate katas for reference in bunkai training.

Dereck, you are absolutely right, fighting is improved by fighting. However you are also right that you need to build up your abilities through training other skills.

My point was not that by improving the forms taekwondo fighters the world over would miraculously improve. Forms encapsulate a style. That is their purpose. That is not how it is for taekwondo because the art was created over the years following the creation of the patterns. It should have been the other way around so that the patterns reflect the art.The result currently is that Taekwondo fighters practice basic movements that they dont use in any meaningful way for combat. They use strategies that are nothing like what occurs in the patterns and 1-step sparring that bares no resemblance to anything.

Taekwondo is a unique martial art and it's practitioners should fight in a unique manner based on the strategies and movements of the art. What I am proposing is that those strategies and movements that are currently in use are cataloged and recorded in a new set of forms. Practice of forms would then re-inforce both the movements and strategies of Taekwondo instead of being a dance exercise that is unrelated to anything as is the current situation IMO.

You said that you will not be able to become a better tkdist from studying the patterns. Well you should be able to. That is their purpose. You said that one learns the basics and then applies them. The role forms are supposed to play is as a guide to how you apply the basics as well as a catalogue of the basic (and non basic) movements themselves. It follows then that the two person drills you develop to isolate skill sets for development will be derived from the forms. Apply the techniques of the patterns in drills against a willing partner to develop technique, then against a resisting partner to develop adaptability, then in free fighting to hone and amalgamate the skills.

From here you can see that it is not purely changing the movements and names of the patterns that I am proposing, but recataloging all the effactive fighting knowledge gained in the 50 plus years of taekwondo's history. The single most scientific kicking art in the world does not have a form that shows the strategies for use of all it's kicks. No form that shows how to best use feet with hands or with grappling/locking or anything.

The forms should follow the art and showcase what it actually is. I just propose that this becomes the case.

Yea I'm with you, they should just get rid of forms all together. there are better ways to practice and learn the fundamentals, forms are no longer a necessity. If anything forms should come from within the students own imaginations as they progress through MA, they develop their own exercise and physical meditative way to practice. Many people like to equate forms to shadow sparring but this is just not the case, shadow sparring is down the way a person would fight, forms on the other hand does not represent fighting nor does it completely represent self defense techniques in the proper context.

This formalized way of practicing is just an outdated method of practicing, if the techniques done in forms must be altered in some way to fit a self defense application then the form is flawed.

Furthermore all styles of TKD forms do not contain the entire arsenal of Taekwondo techniques. Why invest so much of your time in performing incomplete patterns when they must be altered for actual application.

Because TKD is an art it does not mean that a practtioner must practice a ritualized set of patterns especially when the forms have no real meaning and usefulness. As I stated before why not let the forms come within the practitioner. Allowing TKD to be more intuitive for the practitioner. Expressing your own art from within.

Free flowing drills and repetition is the way to go, timing and sensitivity drills should be applied. Free flowing footwork over rigid stances. Spontaneous action over timed reaction. Enough of the block + punch + kick...why not just punch on instinct.

Another thing, we must not dilute TKD as just your adverage kick boxing style. TKD is an asian art therefore it has punches and strikes from multiple angles and numerous tools. We do not neccesarily have to concentrate on the straight punch. We could start focusing on the finger jabs, palm heels and ox jaws. These are striking surfaces to vital areas which are not available with conventional punches.

Again for things like this, we do not need forms, we need drills and exercises to build on attributes. What seperates TKD or any Korean MA from all other forms of MA is it's emphasis on kicks. Korean MA contain more kicks than any other styles. Not that we discard or under use our punches and hand strikes; our kicks are executed differently and employed more.

Every time we turn around people are discussing the value of patterns. Drop them, change them, practice them, learn them, love them.

I'm sure I'm like many of you, where if asked what I'd like to do in class, I am likely to answer "kick stuff", but that doesn't mean I don't enjoy or find value in patterns. In fact, there is nothing I enjoy more than learning a new pattern.

My instructor says its not the moves of the pattern that are important but how you do them.

There is no way you can ever include every technique, variation and combination in a pattern. I see patterns being a sort of dictionary of moves and movements. Like a dictionary it doesn't tell you how the moves go together, although it may give you a suggestion. What you get are the basics which you can then learn to vary to fit different situations. Learning the words doesn't mean you can write a poem, but it certainly helps.

Each pattern in whatever art is a progression of techniques, each successively harder. I've never learned a pattern that hasn't had its own challenges, whether its learning to pivot or to keep my balance in a side kick. Patterns are also one of the few things you can practice on your own, anywhere, and without any other equipment.

Patterns are also about discipline. From my observation, those that are best at patterns are also best at everything else because they are willing to take the time to practice and perfect their patterns as compared to those that just kick and punch in class.

Perhaps since we spend so much time focusing on kicking in the rest of our classes, it makes sense that there is so little of it in our lower patterns as those other techniques don't get as much attention in other areas.

Also, focused as the patterns are in gradually increasing difficulty and technical requirements, it also makes sense that those patterns which so adequately represent TKD do not appear until higher patterns. The technical difficulty required in many of those techniques means that it will take most students years to gain enough skill to perform them.

Tek9 I see where you are coming from, but I disagree with your assessment of the overall usefulness of forms.

The need to alter movements in forms (at least in older MA's) comes from two main reasons. Firstly the culture of secrecy surrounding MA training, if an enemy understood your forms they understood your fighting style and could use that knowledge against you. Thus movements were concealed so viewing a form would not be enough to learn the art.The second reason is that to encompass every possible variation that could occur from a movement or position would require an infinitely long form. Homogenising movements to encompass a number of possibilities while expressing none or a few specific ideas fulfils both reason 1 and forces the student to keep an open mind. Plus the very shape of a movement can act as a guide to the shape of the art inspiring new application beyond the defined but still within the framwork of an art. On top of all these reasons there is the fact that forms are training exercises. A mid or high height kick is more work than a shin kick. When it comes to forms, their ambiguity is in many ways their beauty.

The other point you made that I disagree with is that students should be allowed to make up their own forms. Fine, once you have mastered the art that is already in place and you understand and can use all aspects of it as well as understanding something of the world of combat beyond your art, but if students are just making stuff up they feel they like (which we all do/did and will continue to see regardless) they will not really gain anything and they certainly won't be learning the art as it is defined. If they are not learning and practicing a defined art then what are they learning. It is my assertion that TKD is more than a collection of random techniques that can be strung together any which way you feel. It is it's own martial art with its own tactics and combat theories. Students need to be guided through those. Teachers can't give everything, both because of their own short comings and the students, forms act as a text book for when the teacher is not around, and even a guide for the teacher himself to continue his study.

Re-made forms would give students a way to live and learn the art without having to be spoonfed info. It would give them something to meditate on and become one with. Drills are good and absolutely necessary, but if all you have is defined drills then all you have is two person forms. It is no different except that you cannot practice it on your own and becuase the movements can't be altered without altering the drill they are more psychologically rigid than solo patterns. I also advocate new forms being designed around the concepts of self defence and fighting. I agree with what you said about the current forms not relating to TKD fighting or SD and I think they should.

With all that said, in this modern age of video forms are not 100% necessary, but I find them a far more traditional, elegant and effective solution to the problem of re-cataloguing an art than just creating 50 or 60 training drills sticking them on video and making every 5th dan and above memorise them all and pass them down the line.

Quote:You said that you will not be able to become a better tkdist from studying the patterns. Well you should be able to. That is their purpose.

If patterns are the only thing you study and have no application of the techniques with resistance then no, you cannot become a good TKD'ist. However I agree that patterns as a part of a curriculum can most certain benefit one's training as long as what is in the patterns is important. For say a person only interested in TKD sparring then I don't believe they will be as useful. Don't get me wrong, there is a lot of good stuff in patterns that I understand and practice myself, however I only figured that stuff out from doing practical training with resistance and then related it back. I'm a hands on kind of person and once I understand the actual technique then I have no problem recognizing it in the patterns. For others they may learn the opposite way.

From your posts I am understanding you more and more and I think it would be difficult to have much in the patterns that could encompass all that TKD. TKD has a lot of kicks that is is famous for but many of these would not be done their true justice by mimicking them in the patterns. Seeing them in actual action is more impressive and I think why TKD has its sparring, to showcase its pinnacle. Perhaps TKD's founders realized this and why they chose breaking and sparring as these certainly showcase the kicks that TKD is famous for.

I think the questions would be, do you think TKD is lacking in these skills due to them not being present in the patterns? I'd have to say no and why I don't think changing the patterns to include them would make that great of an impact.

_________________________"IF I COME ... I'M BRINGING THE PAIN WITH ME"

Quote: However I agree that patterns as a part of a curriculum can most certain benefit one's training as long as what is in the patterns is important. For say a person only interested in TKD sparring then I don't believe they will be as useful.

My problem with the current patterns is that their really isn't much in them and what is there is a throwback to old Shotokan ideas as opposed to reflecting the modern vibrant art of TKD.If someone's only interest is sparring then they won't care about patterns whatever you do to them, but I'm talking about a worldwide reform.

Green belt, you have a good start, but there is much much much more to patterns as a martial tradition if not as an aspect of TKD. Your assesment of TKD patterns is pretty correct IMO, but there could be so much more to them.

The more you look at the Chang Hun System the more interesting it becomes, notwithstanding the many simiarities to the Shotokan / Shorin / Shorei systems. Interesting aspects include the progression of movement starting with such progressions as learning quarter turns, then half , then 3/4 then full turns. The fact that the "Blocks" in 8 out of the first ten patterns start with an opponent to the left side and you are moving toward them. Easiest Kicks appear first and difficulty increases until more athleticaly demanding moves are added.

What I meant by students performing their own forms, I meant it not as a way of combat, but as a way of perfecting their technique. which in case is what taekwondo considered an art.

For me the distinction between fighting system and art is how the person practices. Anyone can throw a punch or kick, but practicing the technique over and over, performing it slowly, quickly, using different levels of inensity and trying to perfect it is what I consider to be a criteria of art. In this case a student making up his/her form is an artistic way for them to express themselves or practice. It's may not necessarily be like shadow boxing which is the preferred method for boxers to practice how they will actually fight. But there are times when even a boxer, is just throwing out punches with different intensity but mainly focusing or visualizing or just plain working his angles on footwork. This is what i mean.

I took a look at the clips you posted. if I am correct that style of karate does not formalized forms. However, they do have exercises which to me looked as if that kid was just performing 10 different exercises together which makes it look like one standard form. If that is the case, I can see how it benefits. I know that many kenpo schools do the same thing. Taking their drills and self defense exercises and performing them as one whole form. Not bad because the person is actually practicing the movements as if they were being done on an opponent. Unlike traditional forms where much alteration must be done in order to make them applicable to modern self defense. Which I believe was your original point.

As far as saying that taekwondo is an art with it's own set of rules and concepts, I believe your are sounding like a TKD purist which may be okay for you but others like myself prefer using other methods, concepts and/or ideas from other styles.

In my opinion it is a bit narrow minded for many reasons to be a purist. It stops growth because it asks you to follow a set of techniques and rules blindly. No innovations can come from that mentality. It is very clear that taekwondo is not an close fighting art, although the taekwondo-man has techniques which he/she can employ, the emphais of the art as a whole does practice this way. With kicks being stressed more than any other art, this makes TKD a long range art and at best an art with mid range skills.

Clearly you can see that by only accepting these limitation would be detrimental to any martial artist who wishes to be a well rounded martial artist.

I myself use other arts and styles to advance such as kenpo and boxing for mid range combat and JKD/FMA for close range, I use thai boxing and bjj for grappling.

Once again not that TKD does not have techniques for these areas, but they are not as vast nor do they emphasize this area of combat as much as other arts.

I am going to weigh in on this. As a student of both I.T.F. TKD and Modern Kenpo, I say forms,patterns,kata are a good thing to practice as long as you understand why the moves are there and what they represent.In my opinion, TKD has become so sport oriented that the practical self defense applications are disappearing. In my present TKD school for example, we practice patterns that have a spinning backfist in them yet we are told in free sparring not to do a spinning backfist since it is not allowed in tournaments. This emphasis on "rules" will get you hurt in a real situation.Practice forms to develop muscle memory.

What you describe as students creating free artistic practice sets is a natural and common occurence already and students would always be free to do so.Mastery of technique is certainly a part of an art, but there is more than just movements to perfect. Understanding and mastery of the methods and tactics of that art is also important and if you do not have anything you consider as a unique method to your art then you are just practicing dance moves as the kicks and punches loose their purpose. the technique of a taekwondo technique should be linked to it's correct usage. A student making up their own exercises while artistic, teaches them nothing about how their art should be employed. Also keeping a record of those methods and tactics in forms I believe is important to the art.

Take Shotokan for example. Many changes have been made to the art and much of the Shotokan world is sport oriented, but for those who wish to the forms exist and can be studied in order to understand the fighting concepts of the art.

The clips I posted were not randomly made up movements, they were kata. they are the modern forms developed in Ashihara Karate. Ashihara realised that no one really understood the classical kata he had been taught and that they did not reflect at all what he considered practical fighting, So he made new forms to contain the methods movements and ideas that he felt were useful for combat. This is what I am talking about TKD doing. Making new forms based on how TKD actually fights instead of using old outdated ideas that dont fit with the art anymore.

I am by no means a Taekwondo purist, TKD is one of many arts that I have studied and it was not the first. Although I see nothing wrong with being a purist so long as you understand the strengths and weaknesses of what you do. Someone who wants to be a purist must accept that usually this will not mean being 100% rounded and most dont want to admit that. While I agree that cross training is useful and even important, I believe that each style should be proud of and clear about it's individuality. Taekwondo by its forms currently is psuedo karate. The actuality of Taekwondo as it is practiced is an entirely different art but the past idea of what TKD would become that is illustrated in the forms is being clung to.

I totally agree that TKD is a long to mid range art with some close quarter elements. I don't see that as a weakness, just a different way of doing things, and this is someone who has trained in specific arts for each range.Yes if you want to become more proficient at other ranges you should go study other arts, but TKD has its own ideas of combat and mastering TKD involves understanding and mastering these. The quest to expand individual skills is for the individual, the recataloguing and redifining I am talking about is for Taekwondo as a whole, and I feel that Taekwondo as a whole would benefit from it.

1. An SD art similar to old-style Okinawan Toudi and Chinese Quan Fa, based on the patterns, not the kick-block-punch interpretations but more complex grappling and striking. This was pretty much lost and was taught to relatively few people by the founding masters. I don’t have time to go into this now, but I’ve done *a lot* of research on it, and I’m very confident that this was the case. I have also come across a lot of evidence to suggest that neither the Chang Hon nor the WTF patterns were “patchwork” forms, but contained a coherent SD syllabus which unfortunately was never really taught as such.2. The hard punching and kicking style, I suppose rather similar to Kyokushinkai, which was taught to the general public in the 1950’s and ‘60’s, and also to the military with added neck breaks etc.3. The spectacular high-kicking, board-breaking version exported to the West in the late 1960’s, a bit lower on contact and higher on mysticism.4. The modern sport styles, particularly the Olympic-oriented one, which has evolved into a sporting activity loosely based on but in reality almost entirely separate from the other versions, and with very little to do with SD. That’s not to say that sport-oriented schools don’t do patterns, SD, etc, just that their sparring styles have taken a completely different path which is not intended for SD.

Check out any of the debates I participated in up to a few months ago, and you’ll find a lot of discussion on this.

If you research shows you all that you stated I'm extremely impressed at your research skills and I can understand why you would not want to change.

Can I just ask where you found the information on the forms and their SD applications in your first point. My understanding was that TKD was based on the Shotokan the Japanese taught the koreans. Its long been realised that the Japanese, particularly the Shotokanka knew absolutely nothing about application beyond a solid and powerful punch kick ability.

If you research shows you all that you stated I'm extremely impressed at your research skills and I can understand why you would not want to change.

Can I just ask where you found the information on the forms and their SD applications in your first point. My understanding was that TKD was based on the Shotokan the Japanese taught the koreans. Its long been realised that the Japanese, particularly the Shotokanka knew absolutely nothing about application beyond a solid and powerful punch kick ability.

this is what has been well quoted in interviews with early masters over the years, and i would also like to know where this new information was found?

Right, I hope you can understand that I don’t want to go into detail here and now about this, nor do I have time to do so. All will be revealed in time. However …

My research regarding the historical side is good old-fashioned academic investigation, and has drawn on (a) existing published texts (b) discussions with masters (c) observation of tendencies within TKD and related arts (d) study of the patterns themselves. As is so often the case, it’s more a question of adequately analysing the existing material and seeking out lesser-known (but still openly available) sources, than it is of discovering secret treasure troves of information. From there you draw your conclusions within a strict investigative framework, some of which are pretty cut and dried, others more open to debate, but – hey – most academic study worth its salt involves a certain degree of hypothesis.

The Shotokan thing, right, there was a big Shotokan influence, and indeed Shotokan has a reputation for being very “face-value” kick-block-punch. However, pre-WWII Shotokan was quite different from the more modern version, and the former certainly included a fair amount of gripping and throwing. Whether that was directly connected with the patterns is another question.Apart from that, at least three (probably four or five) other styles, all of them what we could consider “old-style” form-based MA’s, had strong, traceable inputs into the TSD/KSD taught in the early kwans. And I’m not talking about Taekyon or Soo Bahk.

About the SD applications, well, that’s the big question really, isn’t it? There are plenty of people around doing “the bunkai thing”. The question is how practical it is and how well it fits the context of the art and the patterns, i.e. was it really there or are you trying to force a square block into a round hole?

So, no, for me at least I wouldn’t want to change the patterns. But bear in mind that this is just the direction I’ve chosen to pursue within the wider context of TKD. For my needs it’s the most satisfying and effective one, but this does not in any way imply that I reject out of hand the “hard-style” and “sporting” versions – they’re just not for me.

Hope that answers your questions, at least initially. Really, I don’t want to go into details at this stage, and I can’t guarantee I’ll be around to engage in much debate in the near future.

I second that, especially as TKD&KMA magazine over here has had at least one of the pioneering Masters admitting they they had no clue as to what the meanings were and that techniques were added 'because Choi liked them that way'.

Right. I don’t want to start up an ITF-WTF debate (there are plenty here already ), but bear in mind that the ITF has always been overwhelmingly dominated by the influence of one man (Choi), while early TSD/KSD is undeniably a far wider phenomenon involving at least half a dozen other masters who are known to have studied “old-style” arts and who in some cases outranked Choi.

Quote:Right. I don’t want to start up an ITF-WTF debate (there are plenty here already ), but bear in mind that the ITF has always been overwhelmingly dominated by the influence of one man (Choi), while early TSD/KSD is undeniably a far wider phenomenon involving at least half a dozen other masters who are known to have studied “old-style” arts and who in some cases outranked Choi.Cheers, Simon

No debate here, as that is true. I however would say that Gen. Choi ran things as a General, even after he was out of the military, so he ruled with an iron fist. However, he was aided by many leading Martial Artists, who contributed so much & were in the his shadow, some even outranking him as well.So it is similiar to the TSD/KSD situation, but they just didn't get as much credit as the General.

Quote:Right. I don’t want to start up an ITF-WTF debate (there are plenty here already ), but bear in mind that the ITF has always been overwhelmingly dominated by the influence of one man (Choi), while early TSD/KSD is undeniably a far wider phenomenon involving at least half a dozen other masters who are known to have studied “old-style” arts and who in some cases outranked Choi.Cheers, Simon

No debate here, as that is true. I however would say that Gen. Choi ran things as a General, even after he was out of the military, so he ruled with an iron fist. However, he was aided by many leading Martial Artists, who contributed so much & were in the his shadow, some even outranking him as well.So it is similiar to the TSD/KSD situation, but they just didn't get as much credit as the General.

Right, what I mean is that despite the general's later influence in the wider politics of the KTA, etc, in the beginning he was the founder of just one of several kwans, and when he founded the ODK several other kwans had been operating for a number of years. In fact, Choi was a graduate of one of these kwans. While not wishing to diminish his role in KMA, I think it's important to realise that Choi's vision of the art was just one of maybe four or five fairly different styles. It just happens that he was the one who rose above the rest politically speaking and was able to make the name "father of TKD" stick.

Quote: Right, what I mean is that despite the general's later influence in the wider politics of the KTA, etc, in the beginning he was the founder of just one of several kwans, and when he founded the ODK several other kwans had been operating for a number of years. In fact, Choi was a graduate of one of these kwans. While not wishing to diminish his role in KMA, I think it's important to realise that Choi's vision of the art was just one of maybe four or five fairly different styles. It just happens that he was the one who rose above the rest politically speaking and was able to make the name "father of TKD" stick.

Yes I agree. However he was what many consider CO-Founder of the Oh Do Kwan, along with GM Nam Tae Hi. GM Nam was his military subordinate, but many think he was the better Martial Artist. GM Nam was a very early member of the Chung Do Kwan. Mr. Choi was not. He was at one time, someone who oversaw it, but that was probably because of his military position. Mr. Choi's MA background was self report of studying TaeKyon under his caligraphy teacher & training in Karate (1st & 2nd dan) when he was in Japan at school.

There is no question that his position as a Major General & Ambassador, afforded him great opportunity to do wonders for the development. I also love his patterns & wouldn't change them. I also think they are better than the others, but then I am biased!

I got the TaeKwon-Do interactive CD Encyclopedia last week. According to it Gen Choi. did create most of the patterns. Many of them were created while he was in Vietnam. But I am having trouble finding the practical applications for the patterns. I am able to view all the patterns (tuls) but not one interpretation of them. Can anyone point me in the right direction please?

A 2nd Dan Shotokanka at that time in Japan would have known not a thing beyond block punch and kick. this is well documented, much to the dissapointment of many modern Shotokanka. If that is Choi's MA background then any martial application beyond block punch and kick will come from Taekyon or his own general military experience. I know nothing about Taekyon, can anyone add a little abou?

According to Master Choi he learned Taekyon from his calligraphy instructor. We have to take him at his word. But many people do not believe it to be true. It is not even known if taekyon was even an art for sure. There has been some evidence but nothing is well documented. Furthermore Koreans have a history of distorting the facts when it comes to their martial arts heritage.

Like the ninja masters which all of a sudden started popping out of japan and America during the late 70's and 80's due to the martial arts b-movie rage. SO to have many taekyon masters and groups in Korea.

It is safe to assume that the self defense techniques fdid not come from the forms or patterns but from other source like ju-jutsu, judo, hapkido a.k.a daito ryu aiki-jutsu.

Hwang Kee the man who's particular style Moo Duk Kwan Tang Soo Do was practiced by 90% of the population at the time had studied Shotokan and other Chinese arts. When asked why the Pyung Ahn forms looked so much like the Shotokan forms...the answer was he took the forms out old Okinawan books he studied.

Quote: TaeKwon-Do interactive CD Encyclopedia last week. According to it Gen Choi. did create most of the patterns. Many of them were created while he was in Vietnam. But I am having trouble finding the practical applications for the patterns. I am able to view all the patterns (tuls) but not one interpretation of them. Can anyone point me in the right direction please?

Well the 1st pattern created was HwaRang, followed by ChungMu & UlJi. (Not sure the order, but I will find out). The main assistance for these was Nam Tae Hi & Han Cha Kyo. Then came GaeBaek, which CHoi Chang Keun helped with. The next 16 were mainly developed when Mr. Choi was Ambassador to Malyasia, in that Country. The final 4, Moon Moo, Eui Am, SoSan & ChoiYong were developed by 1972. Of course, Juche replaced KoDang in the 1980s & credit for that goes to Park Jung Tae.As fas as the applications go, they were & are pretty simple & straight forward. They are outlined in the 15 Volume Encylopedia. The way the Ambassador set up his Chang Hon style was that there are 3,200+ fundamental movements. You learn the movements & apply them to the situation. There are some good books on the hidden applications, including one I highly recomend by Stuart Anslow, a regular contributor here on this forum. I believe they come from the Karate interpetations. I for one do not know if Ambassador Choi knew this lost or hidden applications. However, for me, in the patterns he devised, he gave them simple & straight forward applications. This of course was his choice, as he designed them.

Quote:A 2nd Dan Shotokanka at that time in Japan would have known not a thing beyond block punch and kick. this is well documented, much to the dissapointment of many modern Shotokanka. If that is Choi's MA background then any martial application beyond block punch and kick will come from Taekyon or his own general military experience. I know nothing about Taekyon, can anyone add a little abou?

As stated above, his applications were simple & laid out in the 15 Volume Encylopedia.

Hwang Kee the man who's particular style Moo Duk Kwan Tang Soo Do was practiced by 90% of the population at the time <<<<

Don't know where this comes from. Virtualy every source lists the Chung Do Kwan as the first and largest gym predating even the Japanese expulsion from Koerea.

This has been what I have found, doing my research. However, there is a claim that the SongMooKwan was 1st formed March 11, 1944, 6 months before Won Kook Lee founded the ChungDoKwan in September of 1944. It is then believed that both shut down, until the end of WWII & the Occupation. It was then reported by the SongMooKwan that they re-opened on May 2, 1946, after the ChungDoKwan re-opened the month before, in April of 1946.

Quote: Hwang Kee the man who's particular style Moo Duk Kwan Tang Soo Do was practiced by 90% of the population at the time <

In a sense, this is true, as most of the Country was practicing Tang Soo Do or Tung Su Do. It was just that the Kwan or school called MooDoKwan was not the 1st or largest. They did break into 2 groups & they did not align themselves with the early mid 50s attempts to unify under the name Tae Kwon Do. However, no matter the Kwan name, they were all basically doing TangSu or Karate.

Quote: According to Master Choi he learned Taekyon from his calligraphy instructor. We have to take him at his word.

Nope. We don't

This is true. However, the Arts were outlawed at the time, as most of the entire education system, language culture etc was. It is just that we do not have anything else to go by. As far as I know, there is no evidence to support the claim, nor is there any to refute it. Back then, cameras were few & far between & very frankly, they did not know they were making history, nor did they know the scope & influence they would have, back then. Very few can back up claims from back then. But no one can deny the impact & importance that Ambassador Choi played in developing & promoting & spreading Taekwon-Do to the world. It is a fair assessment to make, that there were many senior to him, even more talented, However, few if anyone else had the power he yielded as a major general & ambassador in a developing Nation. This power was critical in helping this Art grow.

What other chinese arts, where did he study them, under which teachers were they studied and why is there not one jot of evidence in the movements of the forms of any influence outside of Shotokan (I say that as someone who has studied Karate TKD and Kungfu among other things)?

As for the self defence coming from other Japanese arts, I would ask the same questions, and why are these arts not on the list of Choi's MA achievements?

I have never heard any claim that Ambassador Choi studied Chinese Arts. I think that was meant for Mr. Hwang Kee & others. I know they called it TangSu, so to avoid using the Japanese term Karate, as that was basically the Chinese way of describing the same things. That was done for obvious nationalist pride & to avoid the hated Japanese influence.

Actually it was the Okinawan way. They used the characters "china/chinese hand". It was pronounced karate, Then it went to Japan and 'kara meaning china/chinese' was replaced with 'kara meaning empty'. Both words are written differently but pronounced the same. Tang Soo is the korean way of saying China Hand.

Can we please stick to the original question, that is, WTF forms/patterns. I am conscious of the fact that we have had MANY debates on the ITF tuls, so I think it would be nice to keep this thread relavant to WTF forms, the teaching of which is far more inconsistent.

Sorry, but the original post applied to ALL Taekwondo. Not just WTF (or indeed ITF)

Quote:Can we please stick to the original question, that is, WTF forms/patterns. I am conscious of the fact that we have had MANY debates on the ITF tuls, so I think it would be nice to keep this thread relavant to WTF forms, the teaching of which is far more inconsistent.

Quote:I am thinking of the WTF, I've never trained ITF, although I'm sure this question could be applied to them too.Should Taekwondo do away with the patchwork forms they made up in a fit of rigteous anti-japanese nationalism and either do away with forms altogether, or decide on stylistic combat principles, self defence techs and training drills and design a set of new forms with complimentary training that they can use to reform the art en masse? Or should they just keep their forms and carry on as normal?

Well it was for both the ITF & WTF. Yes, we have gone off topic slightly, but the original theme was if I am correct, that the forms were put together in haste, to distinguish them for Japanese Karate.

My answer remains the same, NO. For me they are fine. I know others may not feel that way & that is fine. I guess it depends on what you look for a MA for & what is your emphasis on oyur indivdual training.

However, getting ack to the original theme, I find a flaw in it. I don't think they were done in haste. The occupation ended in 1945. The Kwans started to surface right at that time. The original Korean patterns came in the late 1950s, with HwaRang 1st, followed by ChungMu & UlJi. The 4th one was GaeBaek. The next 16 were done by 1965, when Ambassador Choi was in Malyasia on his diplomatic assignment. The final 4 were finished by 1972, with Juche being added in circa 1980s.

Also, keep in mind, the patterns & their movements were constantly refined over the years. So I reject the original theme that they were done in haste. I know a seperate group was working on their own patterns in the 1960s. I also know that when the ITF left Seoul in 1972 for Canada, the WTF formed in 1973, adopted a set of forms to be different from the ITF Tuls. I have been told & read that they (WTF) then changed those forms for a newer set, as some people say they were done in haste, needing a new set, so they didn't have to copy General Choi's Tuls of the ITF.

Noted early generation Korean instructors, like Choi Kwang Jo (ITF Cheif Instructor) Jhoon Rhee (Founding member of the ITF) & the late GM Lee (former ITF who then led the ATA) all came up with their own patterns. So there has been change, a lot of change, over the years.

Remember, there was between 10 & 40 years of development of the ITF Tuls, since the occupation ended in 1945.

Quote:Actually it was the Okinawan way. They used the characters "china/chinese hand". It was pronounced karate, Then it went to Japan and 'kara meaning china/chinese' was replaced with 'kara meaning empty'. Both words are written differently but pronounced the same. Tang Soo is the korean way of saying China Hand. Very brief summary of things I know and I'm expecting to be corrected

Sorry but if its ONLY about WTF forms then why aren't more WTF guys contributing. I once posted a question about WTF forms and the answers I got basically displayed a ho-hum attitude to WTF forms. If more people contributed about WTF forms then it might not be so dominated with ITF discussion.

_________________________
See how well I block your punches with my jaw!!

As a WTF guy I could only answer so much. Perhaps if I was as interested in the forms as I am with other aspects of martial arts I would find it more interesting and could provide more, but that is not the case. Sorry.

_________________________"IF I COME ... I'M BRINGING THE PAIN WITH ME"

Well I can speak from my experience as Moo Duk Kwan Tang Soo Do and WTF TKD. I learned all my self defense from TSD but when it comes to attacking, counterattacking, footwork and sparring I learned this from WTF TKD as it has to do with competition. And although much of the sparring is limited to mostly kicking techniques, because of my previous training and solo innovation I altered it to fit what i learned in self defense.

I see Olympic style TKD as the missing link to all other Korean styles. Heck, I see it as the missing component to any art. Much the way I see ground grappling/wrestling.

The alterations to the kicks and the footwork + stances, and the new scientific methods of training are vital to any art.

And the above to me is the only difference between "traditional" and "modern" Everything eles is pretty much the same. Although I myself have not done a study... and even though it was something I really wanted to do as part of my undergraduate experimental lab course. I am positive there is a correlation with how competition TKD versus self defense TKD affects the attitudes of children. Competitive TKD tends to have more aggressive students. But thats just part of my hypothesis.

Anyways back to forms. I am not a fan of forms, particlarly the Pinan set which basically all Japanese and Korean Forms set are a copy of. Yes this includes ITF Chun ji forms/patterns. They basically all have the same techniques in a different sequence...You might as well have students make up their own forms if this is the case. On top of this much of the self defense and fighting is completely different from the forms, that means these forms/patterns/dances are not useful. At least not in this day and age.

I will state reasons why now.

As an example, I bring up jeet kune do. An set of concepts and methods of training combined from different methods of combat. JKD takes a different approach to combat, it is really not a form of self defense but actual fighting. It focuses on attacking and counterattacking. Much of their earlier training came from the stylistic stereo types from different martial arts. You see unlike now a days, the early martial artist actually did fight the way they trained. No matter what style they were the old adage "you fight how you train" held true. Which is probably a reason why so many arts are starting to move away from forms training, not because it's useless but simply because there are better ways to train. This can be the case why many martial artist develop their own set of forms to reflect a modern approach to combat.

Anyways, JKD took into consideration the mechanical movements of these styles such as the stances, double chambers, hip chambers, side chambers ect. This is evident just by the way your particular style decides to hold their hands while practicing punches.

Back to my first point... JKD took advantage of one of these stylistic movements such as the chambers. As many of you know when your practicing punches from a horse stance or a front stance there is a left hand chamber that comes out before you punch with your right hand. JKD took advantage of that left hand chamber. In a combat situation a karate man would set up their punch with a left hand chamber JKD trained to trap that first left hand chamber in order to beat the karateman to the punch. This was taken from the wing chun and filipina arts it's known as trapping.

A different example could be the styles such as Shorin ryu, goju ryu and uechi ryu. Some of these styles practice the pinan set but also include other kata that are more of a singnature to their styles. Much of Uechi ryu practice circular open hand bltocking and dirfect striking to the throat using finger jabs and palm heels. This can be seen in their forms. And in fact their step sparring and self defense exercises/drills look and reinforce that approach to self defense. Unlike TKD, which many schools contain a set of formalized superficial non realistic set of step sparring. However, many schools have compensated for this and have altered their step sparring to fit a more modern appraoch to self defense. This leaves the question as to why practice the old forms then, if they were meant to techniques of self defense.

Some of the shorin ryu style katas reflect their styles attributes which are similar to kenpo. Although shorin ryu like most Okinawan styles have multipple sets of forms, we are still addressing what seems to be off shoots of the pinans from shotokan to TSD to TKD (WTF or ITF). Shorin ryu like Uechi ryu still have katas that reinforces their approach to self defense.

Much like many of the kenpo masters. Masters who developed their own set of katas to reflect their approach to self defense and combat using rapid multiple hand attacks and economy of motion along with over kill to deliver their techniques. They katas reflect a more in your face up close and personal style of fighting.

The forms being used by TKD today do not reflect the way it's students approach self defense and combat.

Some arts have their own katas just to make themselves unique. Similar to what WTF TKD did in order to seperate itself from the ITF Chun ji's. They changed the sequence of techniques and uprighted it's stances more. And marketing these set of forms as the "modern" apprach to combat. And for those who value the forms can actually squeeze some real applications from these techniques and apply them to sparring. However, for those of you who spar constantly no matter whether it's Olympic style or w/e. you know the majority of your skills does not come from forms training. But combat drills and modernized exercise sets. While sparring is not fighting and fighting is not self defense. Sparring is a closer tool to actual violence than is solo katas, hyungs, poomse, tuls training.

You'll have to excuse me guys but I've run out of time and my thoughts are now really, really scattered. Please feel free to comment on my ramblings.

One last thing, I prefer to learn self defense/fighting they way ju-jutsu, judo, hapkido, jiu-jitsu, jeet kune do learn. By using drills and partners. This approach may not look as pretty and artistic as say a kung fu or Okinawan kata, but they approach combat in a practical way.

Yes, I would tend to agree that there is limited practical use of patterns for SD. If I was solely training for SD, I would minimize the use of my time dedicated to Tuls. However, for me, Taekwon-Do is a SD Art form. Hence, I love the Tuls. However, to each their own!

no need to apologise. I was just making the comment that we had been told to get back to discussing WTF forms and yet there wasn't that much discussion going on about them anyway, hence the ITF-based discussion ensued.

Perhaps that in itself suggests a lack of interest generally in WTF forms. Perhaps answering the question of the original post.

_________________________
See how well I block your punches with my jaw!!

The whole point is that patterns should be practiced with partners. They're only meant to be practiced on your own if you can't find anyone to practice with.

Take the moves out of order, try one application for a defence and see if you can move into another. Find a move and then practice it with differing types of compliancy up to the point where you don gloves and batter each other trying to use the techniques. That's the point of patterns, you're not supposed to practice them in isolation to SD or without partners. That's the 'new' way of doing them.

You might be right Trevek. I assumed that there would be somebody on the forum who was interested in WTF forms, since they are very important to a lot of ITF practitioners(myself not included). I wonder whether this is due to the weakness of forms as a training tool for WTF Taekwondo, or due to the weaknesses of WTF forms themselves?

The Pinan kata as they exist in Karate are very relevant useful forms. They encapsulate basic self defence from a striking and control perspective. They may be empty dances in TKD and that is why I feel forms should be updated.

Tek9 you seem to be agreeing with me, even down to how I use WTF in my MA training, except that you feel students should make up their own forms rather than have modern TKD catalogued into new forms by its seniors.

You are right, arts do/did fight as they trained. Most Karate styles are trying to return to that state of affairs or understand what they missed that allows their stylistic methods to be more practical. TKD does not fight how it trains so I propose changing the training (forms) to rectify this.JKD is a nice idea but the problem with how they work is that they take techniques out of context. For example one can learn and master the reverse punch of shotokan karate, it is powerful and simple and you may do some damage with it by fitting it into ones generic JKD system. However when taken out of context of the rest of karate you lose its true purpose and effective combative continuations/set ups. Its not the best example but it does fit what I have seen and learned.

One key point is that forms do not remove the need for partner drills. Forms teach you what principles to practice in your partner drills. What is happening in modern MA is that rather than study and understand a finite system such as wingchun etc people are running here there and everywhere trying to pick up bits to make their arts "complete" and I don't just mean by adding grappling. MAists find any kind of drill and start practicing it calling it part of their own art rather than studying what they have in depth to find the answers that art has. Now in TKD's case I think this is both understandable and appropriate as I personally don't see alot of depth in it outside of a particular style of punching and kicking (although within that there are many valid answers for those who wish to find them). However not even that style of punching and kicking has been recorded in forms, let alone the advancements and study in other areas. Nothing that is used in sparring, SD, fighting or anything other than display is currently contained in the patterns (at least not the wtf).

So why not change that so the forms reflect the art that has grown up under the name Taekwondo?

Hmm, okay I see that you did not fully understand what I am trying to convey about JKD. I'm going to have to do a little research and actually quote out of some book now...gosh darnet.

Perhaps I can explain it with judo then. Judo is an art developed by Jigaro Kano. He studied mny systems of ju-jutsu and realized that all these systems were based solely upon techniques. Neither system had a set of underlying principles. Master Kano developed a set of prinicples and only kept the techniques which only adhered to these principles. These techniques became what we know as judo. I could not quote the principles off the top of my head so please don't expect me to. Now some may say..."Well judo is a sport and not an art of self defense" like WTF TKD it is correct to a point. Many of the techniques in judo have been developed for competition sparring. However, many of the traditional techniques work on the principles of self defense/combat. Perhaps you may be thinking "judo has no strikes, it is far removed from a SD sytem", this to would be wrong, Master Kano for the sake of teaching in Universities, removed the most dangerous of techniques including the striking techniques which adhere to the Judo principles. Now looking at Judo, you can clearly see that it is a completely formalized art, unlike JKD which has chosen to ignore the traditional ritualiztic customs of a style and get down to the nitty gritty.

Like Judo, JKD does not just pull a set of techniques from one art and add them to their own. They too have a set of complex principles and apply techniques in relation to these principles. The biggest difference is that they have kept the most dangerous of techniques. Practice is not so formalized, eye gouging and throat striking are still essential combative tools. The block+punch+block+kick is no longer practice. The strike+strike+trap+strike is now the approach and even that has changed to some extent as with ranges and wrestling/ground grappling being employed.

Do you not think that you and many other WTF people, whom I have noticed have (justifiably) little interest in forms, might have their interest increased by making the modifications I suggested?

To be honest, for myself no. For everybody I just want to say that the WTF Taeguek forms really have a lot to offer. If you really look at them you can find many useful technique that you can translate for practical use. However for myself where I can see the beauty the practicalness of forms whether TKD, Karate, etc., patterns/forms are just not something that interests me. I'm more a hands on physical kind of person. When I block I want to block an incoming fist. When I kick I want to hit something. I like physical aspects of grappling with gi and no gi. I like putting on the MMA or 16 ounce boxing gloves or the leather gloves to hit bags, focus mitts or people. I like the physical interaction where I know that I could hurt somebody or be hurt myself. If I'm not straining my muscles, feeling adrenalin or feeling fear then I find my training lacking.

Perhaps one day when my body can no longer keep up to what I want it to do then patterns will be able to fill some of that void, but right now at 38+ I'm still wanting to push things to the limits and have that interaction that patterns cannot fulfill. I do enjoy the one-step self defense patterns because of the force used with the partner and find it much more practical in my learning so if I had to chose patterns of any kind it would be these. Using an imaginary foe to perform techniques in the air on your own just isn't as appealing ... a requirement so I train them ... but if I had a choice I'd drop them.

_________________________"IF I COME ... I'M BRINGING THE PAIN WITH ME"

I am at the stage where I would say not re-invent,get rid of altogether.Maybe at some point in time forms contained something though now its all too mixed and mashed to find.And its over-exagerated movement and its too far from what people actualy do naturaly.

Things are found that are referenced to be like,mauy thai or grappling or boxing etc,I used to do it too,the problem is that those things needed to be there before they could be found in the forms.''oh this is a clinch like mauy thai or grappling like BJJ etc '',though they had to see mauy thai or BJJ to carve it into being that.

Plus non of it works against the best in the world.And I now train with the best in the world in mind.A total loon who could destroy me.

The best way I have seen it said is that forms try to tell you what to do before a fight/violent situation where as in reality the fight/violent situation tells you what to do.

_________________________
I point my saxaphone at the rare Booted Gorilla.

"Nothing that is used in sparring, SD, fighting or anything other than display is currently contained in the patterns (at least not the wtf)."

I suggest you look harder. The only difference between any Shotokan, Tang Soo DO, Kyokushinkai, Taekwondo forms/patters/dance is the difference in the sequence of techniques. If you were to take a look at Master Richard Chuns book on Moo Duk Kwan Taekwondo in the stance chapter you will find ever single stance that is practiced in Okinawan style of karate. Yet not all of these stances are used in the Pyhung set.

Bunkai is the breaking down of these sequences into two+ man practical application. The point I try to make here is that unlike Judo, Ju-jutsu, Hapkido, Jiu-jitsu and Wrestling in order to make those forms applications practical against an attacker the movements must be seriously altered so that they become practical rather than artistic.

I suggest a better way of practicing, why not just practice the way it would be as if you were using a partner. It is already mandatory that you alter the degree of strength and effort in which you apply into a technique, but people who practice bunkai directly from forms, must now alter the technique itself from how it is demonstrated in forms.

Here is the disagreement I have with those who adore the forms practice. TKDist on here like forms because it's artsy fartsy, while I say the true art is found in the perfection of technique, not in a ritualized dance that is so far off from it's original purpose (self defense/combat).

I would rather practice a solo movement (lead leg sidekick)a thousand times to perfect it; so that I can feel that I am getting the maximum power out of the least amount of effort. I want to practice this movement exactly how it will be used in combat to the point where it becomes second nature. Here is where I feel the art lies in martial arts. Not in performing a ritualized dance.

A question to be raised is why are there so many other martial artist who actually apply their art to combat and yet most of them do not practice forms, yet they still claim to be martial artist. Obviously their system of martial art is not questioned because of the ability they demonstrate during competitive combat. Yet those who do practice these ritualized routines are the artist who you least see utilizing their techniques in competitive combat or any form which would demonstrate the usefulness or superiority of their respective art and training methods.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and while I will not argue that watching a well done traditional form by a master practitioner is indeed beautiful. I will argue that the practice of forms alone compared to the practice of step sparring or full on sparring is much more relative and important. Art is not just aesthtic is something that is felt not just seen. So yes while a master practitioner may well execute techniques in a ritualistic dance they may not be able to apply those techniques when the times comes for them to actually put into use what he practiced for.

Shonuff yes I thinkthe use of forms is an outdated approach to teaching the martial arts. I believe using individualized exercises and drills to enhance the self defense and fighting. The same principles can be taught and practiced with more benefit in that manner.

We haven't even begun to talk about timing and sensitivity, these are things that cannot be learned in forms practice.

As a final note, I would like to say that practicing forms can be useful BUT to a certain extent. I am not saying to discard them because they are useless, only that there are different and more beneficial ways to teach the martial arts of which I have given examples of. Thank you,

before you can address an issue like the usefulness of forms, you must first address other terminology issues. It is impossible to have a meaningful discussion of people give different meanings to the same terms used in a discussion. Since there is much disagreement as to the term "Martial Art" it is impossible to have a meaningful discussion concerning what purpose forms training has for Martial Arts. For a NON definitive and brief look at the issue concerning "What is a martial art" you can view the article on my website. (Also one I wrote some time ago on the purpose of patterns)

Quote: before you can address an issue like the usefulness of forms, you must first address other terminology issues.

Earl Sir, I'm not sure if you directed these comments at me or just in general? From my post above I pointed out the following:

Quote: For everybody I just want to say that the WTF Taeguek forms really have a lot to offer. If you really look at them you can find many useful technique that you can translate for practical use. However for myself where I can see the beauty the practicalness of forms whether TKD, Karate, etc., patterns/forms are just not something that interests me. I'm more a hands on physical kind of person.

Just to clarify, I don't find forms useless I just done find them interesting. Forms are fine for some people's training and I train them as well as they are a requirement, but I would prefer that all of my training be hands on and physical. My best classes where I am the most fulfilled are never after a patterns class.

_________________________"IF I COME ... I'M BRINGING THE PAIN WITH ME"

This question to me is one that should be asked in a different thread or better yet on the general forum so martial artist from all styles can post their comments.

This thread is about forms and more specific the taeguek poomse's. Of which I have given my general opinion on forms and the taeguek's.

There was a thread I created earlier when I tried tried to establish common terms between the TKD artist in this forum. I didn't realize that Master Choi had completely changed the general terminology. Not just so it was different from the Japanese but also to expand on it's definition.

Imagine my surprise when Olympic stylist kept saying "I did a roundhouse kick" and the Chon hon stylist where thinking "oh why are they kicking around a house?" "must be part of their training..."

On my last post I touched upon a bit of what I think makes a martial art an art. Remember folks aesthetics is not just what you see, but how you feel about it. It involves all the sense's.

Furthermore when it comes to philosophy and morals, well I think that if you look at it through the Japanese way of budo and bujutsu. The latter way of thinking being attributed for war times. When your sole purpose of practicing the martial arts was for actual combat. And while that era came to past martial artist still found value in their art and changed their way of thinking to give them a new purpose which was to honor their traditions. So now you have martial arts with 2 different purposes. One is for war times and self preservation and the other is for self defense and spiritual development.

>>>Earl Sir, I'm not sure if you directed these comments at me or just in general? From my post above I pointed out the following:<<<

The comment, while in response to your post was directed at everyone since the discussion will proceed like 2 ships passing in the night if people are defining terms differently with regard to whether forms should be changed as it pertains to what the heck they are trying to accomplish. For example, whether you are training only for ...sparring competition,...combat... exercise... challenging yourself... esthetic qualities...Pick any one , or more than one , all of the foregoing or more reasons of your choice to define if it is a "Martial Art'

>>There was a thread I created earlier when I tried tried to establish common terms between the TKD artist in this forum. I didn't realize that Master Choi had completely changed the general terminology. Not just so it was different from the Japanese but also to expand on it's definition.

Imagine my surprise when Olympic stylist kept saying "I did a roundhouse kick" and the Chon hon stylist where thinking "oh why are they kicking around a house?" "must be part of their training..."<<<<

Quote:As a WTF guy I could only answer so much. Perhaps if I was as interested in the forms as I am with other aspects of martial arts I would find it more interesting and could provide more, but that is not the case. Sorry.

this seems to be what happens when a martial art turns into a martial sport.

Quote:There was a thread I created earlier when I tried tried to establish common terms between the TKD artist in this forum. I didn't realize that Master Choi had completely changed the general terminology. Not just so it was different from the Japanese but also to expand on it's definition.Imagine my surprise when Olympic stylist kept saying "I did a roundhouse kick" and the Chon hon stylist where thinking "oh why are they kicking around a house?" "must be part of their training..."

This may be going slightly off topic, so forgive me, as I think it has relavence & I will try to tie it back in.

The term Tae Kwon Do was coined by Ambassador Choi. That is pretty well documented & accepted by most. In addition, his position as a Major General in a developing Country was one that afforded him a vast amount of power & influence. That is pretty obvious. He was instrumental in creating the 1st patterns for Taekwon-Do, also well documented & accepted by most. In addition, he wrote the 1st text on Taekwon-Do, in Korean 1st, then in English. As such, he established most of the terminology used today. There were also some who did the Japanese Katas & still do today. As well as others who created their own patterns within their own Kwans & groups. However, when the Kwans were finally folded into the Kukkiwon, linking themselves to TKD permentantly, this was well after TKD was established in Korea & even after the WTF was formed. Many today, use outdated terms passed onto them, via the Kwan system. So it wasn't so much that Ambassador Choi changed the terminology, he established it. Most adopted it & it wasn't till the WTF was formed over a decade later, that terms were changed, to appear different from Taekwon-Do as already established & spread around the world, through the vehicle of the ITF.There has been few changes to the original terminology of Taekwon-Do. The example that you give about a roundhouse kick is a good one to highlight this. Roundhouse was never in Ambassador Choi's english textbooks, inlcuding his 1st in 1965. It was always called Dollyo Chagi, or Turning kick, as that is the term (turning) that describes the motion. As you can see the terminology reflects what is being described.

Likewise for the patterns. In the early days there were 4. Then they added 16 more. Finally adding 4 more. Later one was changed completely (replaced). If you study these patterns you will see the connection to Karate & then later, that connection weakening.Whether one thinks they should re-invent them, depends a lot on what Master Weiss asked. What are you doing, trying to accomplish or how do you define MA?If it is a sport, then unless you are competing in patterns competition, their importance is less. The same can be said for SD. In fact, a strong arguement can be made that they hamper SD. So it is important to define what we are talking about - so as Master Weiss says, our ships don't pass in the night.For me, I study a SD Art Form. For me, the DO is the most important part of Taekwon-DO. I love the ChonJi patterns. They serve great purpose for my training. So I for one would not re-invent them. However, depending on how one trains & the focus of their training, some re-inventing may be a good thing or even required.

Quote:As a WTF guy I could only answer so much. Perhaps if I was as interested in the forms as I am with other aspects of martial arts I would find it more interesting and could provide more, but that is not the case. Sorry.

this seems to be what happens when a martial art turns into a martial sport.

I agree with this to a degree. For myself I don't TKD spar, I actually hate TKD sparring. For myself I enjoy the striking and kicking aspects of TKD. I like that we incorporate a lot of throwing, tripping and falling techniques. I like the self defense portion of the training. AND I like the grappling component that we add to our training. MMA type of sparring and grappling are definitely more sport and why I can agree to some degree with this.

_________________________"IF I COME ... I'M BRINGING THE PAIN WITH ME"

As for the term "Roundhouse" this was nothing more than a slang adaptation of the term "Roundhouse" as applied to a punch. Boxers do not use such a term, but rather from a hands up guarding position the raised arms were referred to as "The House" and a punch that went around it was nicknamed the roundhouse punch. This slang name was later adapted to kicks that traveled in much the same fashion.

Good point. I'd always used "turning kick" but when I encountered lots of people who kept asking "what's a turning kick" I had to use "roundhouse kick" instead. To me it has always been the turning kick. It's how I was taught (circa a millennium ago)

Quote:As for the term "Roundhouse" this was nothing more than a slang adaptation of the term "Roundhouse" as applied to a punch. Boxers do not use such a term, but rather from a hands up guarding position the raised arms were referred to as "The House" and a punch that went around it was nicknamed the roundhouse punch. This slang name was later adapted to kicks that traveled in much the same fashion.

yes, the current standard & it has been that way for a long time is to announce the name of the pattern at the end. It adds the Korean flavor & gets away from the kihap that the Japanese did. I read somewhere, that the Kihap or Ki was sort of meta-physical & as such, the Ambassador thought it didn't fit well into his scientific approach. They have insisted on 1 exhale per movement, with the exception of connecting motion. This is the tsssss that u r probably referring 2. it is not necessary to make a sound, but rather a sharp/deep exhale to insure the diaphram is utilized. There is no prohibition against kihap at other times, just not in the patterns. BTW, it just came to me, this may be outlined in Mr. Stuart Anslow's recent book, a must have, IMHO.

as far as the history goes, i can add this, when i started in the early 70s, we kihaped at the end & critical times within the pattern, see jhoon rhee's early books, when i started to train with the Founder in the mid 80s, the above standard was already in place. it has been my experience, that the further removed 1 was from the founder, the slower the updates came & many Koreans rejected the updates, for i guess many reasons, but to me it was because u can't teach an old dog new tricks & it would ruin the facade of being the all knowing master, if they now had to tell their sudents, we now have 2 do it this way.

quotethis seems to be what happens when a martial art turns into a martial sport. end quote

I have read this entire post from pg. 1 and find it to be very interesting and informative.

I think the above quote is misleading, passive aggressive, and unnecessary. For me personally, I have not contributed input regarding WTF forms because the whole discussion is ambiguous in it"s nature. Some people enjoy practicing forms and some do not.

The WTF forms speak for them selves. If one looks into them there are many offencive and defencive moves in the ladder forms. The early forms I consider to be just introductory and a foundation from which to build from, forms 1-7

Many people do not find or discover value in learning from forms I don"t care if they are WTF or ITF, I think WTF persons are more apt to admit this as it would not be frowned upon as much by instructors of WTF. We are some what more liberal in our thinking and not as set in tradition. Before any one gets all defensive to this statement I never said that this is necessarily a good thing.

On a personal level the more I advance the more I discover the value contained in each form.

All of WTF forms are derived from what we refer to as the 13 exercises. There was a time in the beginning of my training that I was thinking, why is it so important to learn these boring stupid exercices. Latter I discovered it was so I could learn the forms and each and every exercise is somewhere in every form including the BB forms. The point is that all of my TKD training is important and in time I learn how it connects and contributes to other areas. Do I think they need to be changed, not at this time but would be open to change as the future will ultimately dictate a necessity for change. Last thing TKD needs is to get hung up and stuck in that is the way it is or should be kind of thinking. I did"t see anything in the karate forms link that I am not learning in aspects of my TKD training though not so much in our forms. Point is we are still receiving the training so who cares if it is not all in the forms, this would be an impossible accomplishment anyways, you would end up with one never ending form and lets remember there will come a time when that form will need tweaking too. Nothing can afford to remain the same for ever.

I study TKD from a Master from original school of Chang Moo Kwan. The forms are key in the training process. They include hidden self defense technique, they build muscle strength through isometrics, they teach thru repetition proper technique. They teach combinations for the beginner. You can do the form with power or as a meditation. If you don't get anything out of your forms you are not being taught by someone who actually knows the origins and application of them to begin with.

I get plenty from my forms: Shotokan forms, Crane kungfu forms, just not Taekwondo forms. I've alot of experience analyzing forms from a variety of systems and of them all I find TKD poomse a waste of time.

My main issue is that I see TKD has grown well beyond it's early Karate based bounds into it's own unique art and this is not represented in the forms trained. I can only speak really for myself and I've only really experienced WTF TKD, but I am of the belief that the forms should represent what the art is. I don't feel TKD forms were created with this in mind bearing in mind that the art was just being born when the forms were created and had not had time to evolve and come into it's own.

There is such a wealth of knowledge about realistic self defense, practical fighting, applying kicking techniques in real life, grappling etc etc which was not about back when TKD was born. I think TKD could and should include these things along with the mechanics of how the art is ACTUALLY performed by it's practitioners.

What I envision isn't just changing a few patterns, it's a rebirth of the art of Taekwondo from a broken down form of karate where everything good has been developed seperate to the forms and traditional practices of the art, into a unique codified systemized practical fighting art which trains its self from it's forms as the other classical martial arts do.

A complete modernisation would probably loose forms altogether or simply have them as things made up by the student, however much of the longevity of a system is in its forms. Last night I was out in a park until 2am practicing Karate kata. With no partner and no pads/bag to work on I could still find hours of solo training that involved more than boring repetition and which help internalise one's technique in a much deeper way. When I'm old and can't fight so well I still will have those routines to help keep my body and mind active. Just as when I was a beginner wondering about forms encouraged me to experiment and develop my application of movement and helped me develop physically, so for me loosing forms is out of the question. Remaking them, and in doing so remaking TKD I think would have much value and do wonders for the reputation of the art.

You can superimpose whatever you want onto an arts movements, but if ever someone did as I suggest and actually developed forms with real meaning, TKD poomse would look so different especially at higher levels you'd wonder if you were in the right class.

PSThis actually fits into the TKD a fragmented art discussion as well. If the art is restructured around the modern practices of TKD, Poomse would be changed to match line work, which would be changed to match sparring, which (unless your school wanted to still focus on the sport scene) would be changed to match realistic self defense, which would match the Poomse. Making TKD a unique systemised fighting style and giving it back some respect.

Quote:My main issue is that I see TKD has grown well beyond it's early Karate based bounds into it's own unique art and this is not represented in the forms trained. I can only speak really for myself and I've only really experienced WTF TKD, but I am of the belief that the forms should represent what the art is. I don't feel TKD forms were created with this in mind bearing in mind that the art was just being born when the forms were created and had not had time to evolve and come into it's own.

I would add that much is the same for the ITF as well. They did add on patterns, going from a few Tuls to 20, then 24, with 1 being replaced entirely in the early 80s to incorporate new techniques that came into play after the early days of the 50s & 60s when the 1st Korean forms were created by Gen Choi & his followers.There have also been some modifications over the years, but still many are still close to their Karate roots. What has changed dramaticaly was the movement the patterns are done with.I luv patterns & they have benefits. However I see little relevance to SD. I understand that people kike Choi Kwang Jo & others have done some fighting forms. I am not that familiar with them, although I had the pleasure to see him perform some.

I can only speak to the songham taekwondo forms. I'll agree that the forms, on the face of them, are not well related to sparring. However, forms add value both as an excercise (mental and physical) and in seeing how moves work together. Forcing a student to apply a technique from an awkward transition creates versatility and flecibility that would not develop naturally if all we did was spar and line drills.

To say that forms should be done away with is not far from saying that formal stances should be done away with. Whe ever uses a formal stance in their sparring?? Still, the differences between front, middle, back, and rear stances represent important ideals for body position and alignement to effectively deliver a technique.

_________________________
sam dan Songham Taekwondo
The learning has just begun...

Quote:Formal stances, as with any aspect of the art, should only be kept if those who keep them understand how to train and use them and how they relate to combat (note I say combat as opposed to sparring).

Quote:Do you have an opinion on it or any other aspect of this discussion?

Nobody that knows me would ask if I have an opinion on ...

I'm a half-Irish, half French American. It also entitles me to a mixed opinion!

Yes, I do have an opinion. I consider myself to be a student and teacher of traditional martial arts (lower case "martial") whose mission is to preserve and spread the knowledge of the forms and principles of martial arts within the present constraints of my civilization and culture. Of course those constraints are geographically diverse.

Being that I live in a safe, small, American city, that means that my instruction and spreading of knowledge is best done de-emphasizing the MARTIAL art.

That said, my personal training and the training that I give certain students does not de-emphasize it.

Not to dilute this aspect of the topic but I have another question for others:

Within the constraints of your physical ability and power, do you find it easier to win a match with fewer rules or with very controlled rules? To clarify, I have done a limited amount of olympic sparring and a fair amount of unstructured free work but I only compete in very controlled point sparring. I find it much more challenging to "win" a light contact, controlled match than I do to completely dominate an opponent. (And NO, I don't mean against my students but against my peers). In fact, I find that there is very little room between getting a "point" first and breaking ribs or wrists...

_________________________
sam dan Songham Taekwondo
The learning has just begun...

Now that's one for another thread And by the way I missed your opinion, split or otherwise, on the thread topic?

But as this debate has died I'll throw in 2 cents.

Surely your ability to dominate your peers is indication of either their weaknesses at higher contact levels or your aptitude for said contact levels (or some combination of the two)?The latter factor is where I see much of the "art" of martial art. The expression of personality traits in combat.

For myself who grew up bigger and stronger than my peers until late teens (when I stopped and they caught up) I've always found it hard to cut loose and strike to hurt or overpower people, so I've steered closer to light contact practice and until recently found it easier to win there.

WTF got me over that a little, but learning how to fight with power and not telegraph or slow down or over-extend was and is it's own challenge, one which is often overlooked as most people think cutting loose is easy and forget that full power MA is not brawling.More recently boxing helped me get comfortable at going reasonably close to full power fighting.

I realised that IMO emphasis on control from the outset in an MA is a bad thing. Joe Average in modern western society needs to learn to find and channel his (and especially in my experience her) aggression into correct technique. Only then will he have something which needs controlling. Without developing the inner wild animal, training for control is like putting a leash on a milking cow.

to clarify, I appreciate the martial (fighting) aspect and i train in it but the majority of my emphasis is on traditional art (forms and technique). This is partially a matter of my instructor's philosophy and partially a socio-economic reality.

_________________________
sam dan Songham Taekwondo
The learning has just begun...

Changing the tradition and doing different and more relevant patterns and even centering your training drills around them isn't going to reduce or harm the spiritual, philosophical, sporting or otherwise non-martial elements of the art, nor will it instantly turn your class into a bunch of bareknuckle street fighters. If anything it would enhance those traditional aspects because the forms would have that much more depth and thus more reason for correct technique beyond "teacher said so". Teachers would need to know more about how to adapt techniques for people and situations and many more benefits too.

As you've pointed out, emphasis is up to the individual, but that aspect of choice is removed if the solo training aspects of an art are 1-dimensional.

Quote:Formal stances, as with any aspect of the art, should only be kept if those who keep them understand how to train and use them and how they relate to combat (note I say combat as opposed to sparring).

Thats a study in itself. I am not sure about the term kept.I dont think they should be discarded. I think they should still be practiced even if a person doesnt know how to use them. Because when that person finds some one who can use them the learning curve will be that much easier.

One thing in the ITF when doing patterns is that eyes,hands, feet, and breath come together as one in each movement. Here, mostly in the slow movements, the stance is completed before the technique is finished. Just an observation.

It seems that TKD is becoming a just kicking art. I teach the palgwe forms because there are self defense applications in them. I cover this in class along with all the other benefits of doing forms has to offer.

msb, what is the purpose of this alignment? Does it have combative value?

It sounds like one of those traditions that makes the form harder for the sake of greater discipline as opposed to being something actually used. Note that's not a criticsm, discipline is very important and long before Martial "Art" was about fighting it was about self improvement, but this concept does sound more art than martial.

Quote:msb, what is the purpose of this alignment? Does it have combative value?

It sounds like one of those traditions that makes the form harder for the sake of greater discipline as opposed to being something actually used. Note that's not a criticsm, discipline is very important and long before Martial "Art" was about fighting it was about self improvement, but this concept does sound more art than martial.

Control of breathing is critical in sparring and SD. Hand foot timing in forms teaches one to do multiple things at once, such as block, take space and set up counter, or kick, blocking counter as landing. I don't know the ITF timing and flow, but we reatain that influence.

_________________________
sam dan Songham Taekwondo
The learning has just begun...

Quote:msb, what is the purpose of this alignment? Does it have combative value?

It sounds like one of those traditions that makes the form harder for the sake of greater discipline as opposed to being something actually used. Note that's not a criticsm, discipline is very important and long before Martial "Art" was about fighting it was about self improvement, but this concept does sound more art than martial.

This is part of what the ITF call, "The Training Secrets of Taekwon-Do". These are:

1. To study the theory of power thoroughly.2. to understand the purpose and method of each movement clearly.3. To bring the action of eyes, hands, feet, and breath into on single coordinated action.4. To choose the appropriate attacking tool for each vital point.5. To become familiar with the correct angle and distance for attack and defence.6. Keep both the arms and legs bent slightly while movement is in motion.7. All movements begin with a backwards motion with very few exceptions.8. To create sine wave during the movement by utilizing the knee spring.

All these are meant to help you on your road to learning TKD and making it easier in understanding what you are learning.

Some TKD Patterns are just that, patterns. I know the Songahm patterns were developed to form a Star Pattern when all the patterns were compleat. The "Songahm Star" is a pattern of many movements put to gether as kicking and punching sequances and nothing more. What about the self defense aplications? Wasn't that the origional intent of creating the forms in the first place or was that just a Japanese thing?

Quote:Some TKD Patterns are just that, patterns. I know the Songahm patterns were developed to form a Star Pattern when all the patterns were compleat. The "Songahm Star" is a pattern of many movements put to gether as kicking and punching sequances and nothing more. What about the self defense aplications? Wasn't that the origional intent of creating the forms in the first place or was that just a Japanese thing?

If you think they are just patterns, you missed something or were not told something. The sequence of moves do form a pattern and they do fit together, but the segments are mostly meant as either mini SD or mini sparring groups for the most part.

It's OK though because I missed a lot of it and also thought a lot of the moves were just showy fluff until I started teaching them over and over again.

I think the significance and intent get lost just like everything else as each successive student-teacher passes on only what stuck with them.

_________________________
sam dan Songham Taekwondo
The learning has just begun...

Based on what the Kukkiwon says about their forms. I see no reason in changing them. They clearly followed the method of which they designed the forms around carefully. Alot of thought and hardwork has gone into them, and if you use the guidelines they set forth they are exactly what they say they are.

After all, they techniques can be used individually, or in combination. And the poomse give us all of that and more. And applications are prevalant regardless of style. The Taegeuk for KukkiTKD have a steady increase in techniques and difficulty, and then the black belt forms even more so.

Even the Kukkiwon stated the forms are Taekwondo. So imo changing what it is now, or getting rid of them altogether would be to get rid of Taekwondo itself.

They even have some basic set applications for the movements on the website. Very basic. Which fits perfect with the writings on technique. And they go on to state, the advanced application begins with cultivating inner strength through controlling respiration(sanchin esque I imagine, qigong) And variations on techniques mastered through hard training. Which is not much different than the study of karate kata.

|b. Poomsae containing practicable techniques : This includes practically used techniques only, which are classified into a series of chigi techniques, a series of makki techniques and a balanced combination of chigi and makki techniques.|c. Poomsae containing simple techniques : This is classified into the basic course and the advanced course, in the advanced course, the training of cultivating the inner strength of body by means of controlling the respiration is included. The variations of techniques should be mastered through hard training.|

Their philosophy even fits in with the typical 2 year blackbelt. Most of these guys are looked upon by Karate outsiders who generally begin applications much sooner it seems than the Kukkiwon considers for TKD. But after reading what they say, basics, basics, basics up until advanced course(yudanja forms)it makes sense. After 2 years or so most people at a TKD school do have good basics, and most even more applications than set forth by Kukkiwon. After getting blackbelt, the hard work begins, more applications, years in between ranks. Problem is, most people stop the work at black belt and just ride along. But really, who cares about those ones right? not everyone has to learn martial arts. The poomse are for us. Taekwondo.

EDIT: Im also positive the Kukkiwon holds their 1st dan blackbelts basics to a much higher degree of standards.

Quote:"The Training Secrets of Taekwon-Do". These are:1. To study the theory of power thoroughly.2. to understand the purpose and method of each movement clearly.3. To bring the action of eyes, hands, feet, and breath into on single coordinated action.4. To choose the appropriate attacking tool for each vital point.5. To become familiar with the correct angle and distance for attack and defence.6. Keep both the arms and legs bent slightly while movement is in motion.7. All movements begin with a backwards motion with very few exceptions.8. To create sine wave during the movement by utilizing the knee spring.All these are meant to help you on your road to learning TKD and making it easier in understanding what you are learning. Mike

Great stuff Sir & thanks for osting it. However you are missing point #9 which is every movement requires 1 breath, with the exeption of connecting motion.

Quote:"The Training Secrets of Taekwon-Do". These are:1. To study the theory of power thoroughly.2. to understand the purpose and method of each movement clearly.3. To bring the action of eyes, hands, feet, and breath into on single coordinated action.4. To choose the appropriate attacking tool for each vital point.5. To become familiar with the correct angle and distance for attack and defence.6. Keep both the arms and legs bent slightly while movement is in motion.7. All movements begin with a backwards motion with very few exceptions.8. To create sine wave during the movement by utilizing the knee spring.All these are meant to help you on your road to learning TKD and making it easier in understanding what you are learning. Mike

Great stuff Sir & thanks for osting it. However you are missing point #9 which is every movement requires 1 breath, with the exeption of connecting motion.

Quote:"The Training Secrets of Taekwon-Do". These are:1. To study the theory of power thoroughly.2. to understand the purpose and method of each movement clearly.3. To bring the action of eyes, hands, feet, and breath into on single coordinated action.4. To choose the appropriate attacking tool for each vital point.5. To become familiar with the correct angle and distance for attack and defence.6. Keep both the arms and legs bent slightly while movement is in motion.7. All movements begin with a backwards motion with very few exceptions.8. To create sine wave during the movement by utilizing the knee spring.All these are meant to help you on your road to learning TKD and making it easier in understanding what you are learning. Mike

Great stuff Sir & thanks for posting it. However you are missing point #9 which is every movement requires 1 breath, with the exeption of connecting motion.